1963 SUCKS

Very outdated, and not in a cool way. Lyrically it's not bad, but musically it sounds like any lame pop band from 1987 could have recorded it. The song is so bad, it's almost offensive. So dated, it hurts.

J

Hope you're not expecting anyone to agree with you on here

I think it's overrated. I like the 1995 Arthur Baker mix better. A great song and a worthy b-side to True Faith, but could never understand how people could say it should been the a-side. The outro bass, the keyboard, and the "I just want to feel free" lyrics are top class.

MLANH- "My Life Ain't No Holiday" wrote: Very outdated, and not in a cool way. Lyrically it's not bad, but musically it sounds like any lame pop band from 1987 could have recorded it. The song is so bad, it's almost offensive. So dated, it hurts.

J

Piss off. Everybody has a song they might not like. But that's a lame ass argument.

Wasim wrote: a worthy b-side to True Faith

Exactly.

YOU PISS OFF! The fuck do you think you are telling me to piss off. I obviously LOVE the band, and I love 98.2% of all their songs like they were my children. If there's one song of theirs which I cannot stand, why can't I vent about it a little bit without being scoffed at? Chump.

J

I like 1963, I remember it being ace live in 1899, great video also.

This is an assessment that carries little weight. If you're going to say a NO track sounds dated, why not cite something like State of the Nation where both the production is kind of ridiculous and the songwriting is subpar. 1963 has a classic NO progression.

I love 1963. The Substance version rocks!

Can't say it is any more dated (or outdated) than Face Up or Fine Time, perhaps. Lyrics are fair. I mean, I was never completely worked up over the song as a favorite, but I wouldn't turn it off if it was on the turntable or the cd changer.

To me, it doesn't sound like anything else going on at the time with a slight nod to the instruments, perhaps. It's rather obvious with the synths that it's not something that would necessarily be programmed the same way these days. Other than that, I don't really see the argument on the song.

The 95 version is nice, though. It got tuned the right way, in my opinion. Dropped the wah wah synths and took it more into a upbeat "dance rock" song. In a way.

I guess where I was coming from with "dated" was that although other NO songs also kind of sound dated, they at least have a distinguished New Order feel. I'm not the biggest Stephen Hague fan. I think Republic is sub par, but I do enjoy the song True Faith. I just think that 1963 sounds very melodramatic, and just kind of generic, honestly (music, not lyrics). I respect what they're trying to do, but I just think the song kind of sucks. I think it sounds just waay too cheesy for my liking. By the way, I think the song Subculture on the other hand embodies everything that "electronic" New Order is about.

J

1963 does not suck. End of.

melly wrote: The 95 version is nice, though. It got tuned the right way, in my opinion. Dropped the wah wah synths and took it more into a upbeat "dance rock" song. In a way.

I often play both the original Hague mix and the 1995 version; I wouldn't want to be without the keyboard arrangement of the former or the Hooky bass of the latter. Maybe someone should combine them, but then since they're both lead elements they might not fit together equally.

State of Love and Trust wrote: 1963 does not suck. End of.

Spot on Jack.

I guess my problem with this thread is the title. Although there are certain NO songs that are not my favorites, I don't think I'd ever characterize any of their songs as "sucks." That adjective should be saved for Christina Aguilera's next single. Personally, the Arthur Baker re-mix of 1963 is one of my faves, and that version even cracked the list of my Top 10 NO songs on an earlier thread.

Since we're on the topic here, can I use this thread to debate what the lyrics to 1963 mean? Just kidding...Lord knows that horse has been beaten to death 1,000 times on here already.

If you don't like the song, you don't need to dwell on it. If you don't like New Order, you shouldn't even be here.

MLANH- "My Life Ain't No Holiday" wrote: YOU PISS OFF! The fuck do you think you are telling me to piss off. I obviously LOVE the band, and I love 98.2% of all their songs like they were my children. If there's one song of theirs which I cannot stand, why can't I vent about it a little bit without being scoffed at? Chump.

J

It'll be even less of a holiday round here for you if we have any more outbursts like that!

For what it's worth, or not, while I used to really like 1963 back in the day, I rarely play it these days. There may be a Digital version in the offing though, as I have started sequencing it. You never know!

Now State of the Nation, there's a song that failed the test of time. Stonewall worst 10 NO tracks ever. Unmitigated shite.

it doesn't suck. it rocks. it doesn't sound dated.

surprisingly little of new order's output sounds dated.

I enjoy it with Jane Horrocks on the video.

I wasn't born yet, so wouldn't know :) I really like it, another great NO POP song, agree with those who say the original is lacking Hooky's bass a bit, but don't like the arrangement of the 90's version, so much, combine them? Could be good...

SHEDi xxx

Al Jarvis wrote: Think the original is shit, meself. Remember sticking this on the old turntable (that's gram-o-phone to you kids), playing it through and just thinking, "Where's Hooky?"

The version they released in 93 - or 94 - or 95 - or whenever - is much better once they slapped a load more bass guitar across it. Sounded 'beefier' to me and not so trite.

I actually disagree with you. The original's sound has a more emotional feel to it. The first version I listened to was the Arthur Baker 95 version, and I cried when I heard it because it is a sad song---it was OK, but I like the original version off of Substance better.

I used to play it a lot, back when True Faith/Substance came out - yup, not too much bass (but that was obviously the Stephen Hague influence there), but still very boppy...

Must confess that I haven't listened to the 1995 version that much - preferred the jazzed-up version of "Let's Go" from that single, although I did enjoy the Jane Horrocks video (like Chris) :)

So, sucks? No (should be reserved for "State Of The Nation"!) - just a lovely little song with confusing lyrics! :p

SHEDimon wrote: I wasn't born yet, so wouldn't know :)

haha

now what's the song really about?

SHEDSRUS wrote: \I remember it being ace live in 1899.

my word! i suppose it is a bit outdated, isn't it? ;)

i really like the song. it does sound a bit 'eighties' but that doesn't mean it can't be any good.

I hated this song when I first heard it, but it grew on me. Now I like it, especially the 1995 version.

SHEDSRUS wrote: I like 1963, I remember it being ace live in 1899, great video also.

The Victorians love 1963!

and yes, i think 1963 is a grower on me. I never really liked it stuck on the end of Substance, but now...

No more f'ing saudade wrote:

melly wrote: The 95 version is nice, though. It got tuned the right way, in my opinion. Dropped the wah wah synths and took it more into a upbeat "dance rock" song. In a way.

I often play both the original Hague mix and the 1995 version; I wouldn't want to be without the keyboard arrangement of the former or the Hooky bass of the latter. Maybe someone should combine them, but then since they're both lead elements they might not fit together equally.

Agreed on that there, Sau. I could see the combination of them yielding a few strengths more on the song as a whole - the solidity of the 95's bass/ production with the untrained fragility in B's vocals.. and somehow intermittent allowances for the synths sort of as a spotty nod to the former composition. Perhaps the synths would be best reserved solely for the chorus bits.. no, the chorus follow synth was pretty simple, but the break inbetween the chorus and the next lyric set is nice.

If I had any clue of how to go about doing that myself I might would make my own mashed version. Maybe I oughta research into that.

(off topic, but your title has put that Love and Rocket's song back into my head. I'd curse you, but I hadn't heard it in a while and it's not as bad as having "Good Vibrations" by Marky Mark stuck in there. )

melly wrote: (off topic, but your title has put that Love and Rocket's song back into my head. I'd curse you, but I hadn't heard it in a while and it's not as bad as having "Good Vibrations" by Marky Mark stuck in there. )

Sorry. I've never heard the Love & Rockets tune, the whole screenname just came from having listened to bossanova for too long. Even the Peter Saville Soundtrack works better as background music for me now.

The song doesn't suck at all, it's one of my favourites, but the video sure does.

oldmonkey wrote: For what it's worth, or not, while I used to really like 1963 back in the day, I rarely play it these days. There may be a Digital version in the offing though, as I have started sequencing it. You never know!

Now State of the Nation, there's a song that failed the test of time. Stonewall worst 10 NO tracks ever. Unmitigated shite.

I don't know if that's true. There was no test of time with it, if I recall correctly everyone thought it was shite the second it was released and noone has changed their minds since. I'd add We All Stand to that list. Everytime I hear it I have to convince myself it's actually New Order, so utterly unlike anything else they've done before.

As for 1963, I've always thought it sounded absolutely gorgeous, the synths just beautiful as they open the first verse of the tune, the closing, everything, wonderfully beautiful and I prefer it to the Arthur Baker Remix (though the remix is a remarkable example of a complete reworking of a song that doesn't actually ruin it). Beautiful, beautiful song, I have a hard time understanding how someone could not love it, let alone think it sucks, but that happens a lot with music, sometimes we're all on the same page, sometimes we're clearly not. I'd definitely put it among my top 5 all time New Order favorites.

As for the Sub-Culture remix, can we agree that even if the remix sucks, the bass solo after that boomerang synth effect at the end of the song is absolutely kick ass?

Did Hook go back into the studio and play a new bass part to the song (on the 95 remix i mean)

J

I assume so. I'm 99% sure Barney either rerecorded his vocal or they used a different take because it definitely doesn't remotely sound like the original "True Faith" B-Side version vocal.

Wish they would play it now instead of Blue Monday :D

Stephen Smith wrote:

oldmonkey wrote: For what it's worth, or not, while I used to really like 1963 back in the day, I rarely play it these days. There may be a Digital version in the offing though, as I have started sequencing it. You never know!

Now State of the Nation, there's a song that failed the test of time. Stonewall worst 10 NO tracks ever. Unmitigated shite.

I don't know if that's true. There was no test of time with it, if I recall correctly everyone thought it was shite the second it was released and noone has changed their minds since.

That is a pretty good point actually!

Nicky wrote: The song doesn't suck at all, it's one of my favourites, but the video sure does.

The Video is second only to True Faith. Marvellous stuff. And Shug, there was a thread a couple of months back with a several theories about it all. All complete bollocks mind. And Jane Horrocks was born in January 1963.

IMHO this is one of the worst NO tracks- so in some senses I agree with the author of the thread. Actually cam on in the car today and I flicked through pretty quickly

Jane Horrocks was born in January 1964 according to www.imdb.com

What was the video all about anyway ?

Darren Hunt wrote: Jane Horrocks was born in January 1964 according to www.imdb.com

What was the video all about anyway ?

Congratulations. You're the only one to look it up and prove me wrong.

The video is true art. It makes you think. It doesnt really matter what it meant to the person who made it. Nobody can tell you what its about. Its about how you react to it and your own perception.

Personally I have a thing about short skinny blondes of a certain age from Rawtenstall climbing out of a suitcase so thats why it appeals to me.

Damn; I just went past 1963 posts!

Good song, but a grower.

Saying that, I hardly ever play it nowadays, but from time to time I dig out the remix single CD.

Video is cringesome.

Stephen Smith wrote:

oldmonkey wrote: For what it's worth, or not, while I used to really like 1963 back in the day, I rarely play it these days. There may be a Digital version in the offing though, as I have started sequencing it. You never know!

Now State of the Nation, there's a song that failed the test of time. Stonewall worst 10 NO tracks ever. Unmitigated shite.

I don't know if that's true. There was no test of time with it, if I recall correctly everyone thought it was shite the second it was released and noone has changed their minds since. I'd add We All Stand to that list. Everytime I hear it I have to convince myself it's actually New Order, so utterly unlike anything else they've done before.

As for 1963, I've always thought it sounded absolutely gorgeous, the synths just beautiful as they open the first verse of the tune, the closing, everything, wonderfully beautiful and I prefer it to the Arthur Baker Remix (though the remix is a remarkable example of a complete reworking of a song that doesn't actually ruin it). Beautiful, beautiful song, I have a hard time understanding how someone could not love it, let alone think it sucks, but that happens a lot with music, sometimes we're all on the same page, sometimes we're clearly not. I'd definitely put it among my top 5 all time New Order favorites.

As for the Sub-Culture remix, can we agree that even if the remix sucks, the bass solo after that boomerang synth effect at the end of the song is absolutely kick ass?

Once I'd seen (and heard) the True Faith video for the umpteenth time, I turned over the 12" and listened to '1963', two words came to mind back in 1987 and they are still relevant to me now... 'Sheer Bliss'.

There are NO New Order songs that 'Suck' , people have mentioned various songs such as 'State Of The Nation', I will admit that it is not one of their best but there it is an absolute belting piece of music from around 4:51 to the finish of the record.

If you listen hard enough you will find something to enjoy in everyone of their songs.

If you want "dated" just listen to "LowLife" from the shite edit of TPK onwards. You'll back me up on this one Jarvo, eh?

Face Up is like summat you would hear in a German disco.

Francis Maguire wrote: Once I'd seen (and heard) the True Faith video for the umpteenth time, I turned over the 12" and listened to '1963', two words came to mind back in 1987 and they are still relevant to me now... 'Sheer Bliss'.

There are NO New Order songs that 'Suck' , people have mentioned various songs such as 'State Of The Nation', I will admit that it is not one of their best but there it is an absolute belting piece of music from around 4:51 to the finish of the record.

If you listen hard enough you will find something to enjoy in everyone of their songs.

I present you with, "Liar". Unless crap lyrics are the moment of enjoyment, I've never gotten anything out of the tune. Ditto "We All Stand," but I will agree that even some awful tunes like State of the Nation, have decent qualities (like very unusual guitar playing for New Order).

It's one of their better songs (87 version) and better than True Faith. Ok not much Hooky but when he arrives, it's worth the wait.

When I first heard the lyrics, I was 13. I thought, "Is this guy gay or is he talking about his brother?" Never understood that one, I'm sure someone here has written a thesis on it though.

On the 1995 remixes, which btw, I love them all, the Arthur Baker versions have NO BOTTOM END!!! I have to turn the lows up on the mixer because the beat is weak. The 87 version had a nice crack to it. When I bought that 2xCD Single set, I was like, "Is something wrong? There's no fcuking BASS!!" :)

And Subculture Remix rules. That mix always fit right in with a lot of the US freestyle records of that time, 85-89. With all that bass in the middle... that's an AWESOME mix!

And I agree with some of you all about State of the Nation. It could have dated better.

But that's why I flip it over to Shame of the Nation, turn up the bass, break out my cardboard, and start breakdancing! That track shredz!

Stephen Smith wrote:

Francis Maguire wrote: Once I'd seen (and heard) the True Faith video for the umpteenth time, I turned over the 12" and listened to '1963', two words came to mind back in 1987 and they are still relevant to me now... 'Sheer Bliss'.

There are NO New Order songs that 'Suck' , people have mentioned various songs such as 'State Of The Nation', I will admit that it is not one of their best but there it is an absolute belting piece of music from around 4:51 to the finish of the record.

If you listen hard enough you will find something to enjoy in everyone of their songs.

I present you with, "Liar". Unless crap lyrics are the moment of enjoyment, I've never gotten anything out of the tune. Ditto "We All Stand," but I will agree that even some awful tunes like State of the Nation, have decent qualities (like very unusual guitar playing for New Order).

Yes the lyrics for 'Liar' cannot be described as poetry but there is some excellent instrumentation in the song.

As for 'Dreams Never End'...if I can hear Hooky strumming away then that's good enough for me...maybe I'm easily pleased

Stephen Smith wrote:

I present you with, "Liar". Unless crap lyrics are the moment of enjoyment, I've never gotten anything out of the tune.

The one track I would happily never hear again... Although I did listen to the first minute in the car today, before having to forward it... I've never understood the hatred for WAS though Sure it's 'different', but I really like the piano (sound) on the Peel Sessions version...

SHEDi xxx

Shug wrote:

As for the video, I wouldnae trust anyone who likes that fookin thing. Jane Horrocks climbing out of a box and walkin' along a road in the country was that all about?

Well she starts off in the countryside and ends up walking along the canal through Manchester and past the back of the Hacienda. Or at least that's what it looks like.

And the box she's carrying gets bigger and bigger, so big in the end that she's able to climb into it.

I actually find the Peel version of We all stand interesting. I still fast forward through my old cassette of it, but I still find it interesting. Liar has nothing redeeming about it. yeah the lyrics suck, but I'd argue the music is even worse than the lyrics, sounds like a sountrack to some New Kids era tour porn video, just freaking horrible.

I actually like Dreams Never End, so perhaps you were either responding to someone else about that, or mixed it up with We All Stand?

The only New Order material I've ever really found unredeemable are Liar, the PCL version of We All Stand, the first 90 seconds of 5 8 6, Liar, the vocal on the original version of Confusion and that's about it. I find other tunes somewhat loathesome, like Chemical, or erratic like Ultraviolence, but nothing really sucks out loud beyond those couple of moments in my view.

MLANH- "My Life Ain't No Holiday" wrote: Very outdated, and not in a cool way.

You're entitled to your own opinion (however wrong I might think it is argh) but please back up anything you say with some credible argument.

loved it back when it was first released.These ears heard a strong Kraftwerk 'Computer World' influence in the keyboards on first listen.Was more Kraftwerky than the supposed tribute KW1/YSF in my opinion.

The outro with Hooky's bass and Barney's lyrics was musical heaven.Beautiful beyond words.

Rarely give it a listen now though.Bored of it.

The 95 mix was ok-ish.I'd more probably listen to the remixes of that if anything now

MLANH- "My Life Ain't No Holiday" wrote: Very outdated, and not in a cool way. Lyrically it's not bad, but musically it sounds like any lame pop band from 1987 could have recorded it. The song is so bad, it's almost offensive. So dated, it hurts.

J

Maybe you just need one of these :\peek:

oldmonkey wrote: For what it's worth, or not, while I used to really like 1963 back in the day, I rarely play it these days. There may be a Digital version in the offing though, as I have started sequencing it. You never know!

Now State of the Nation, there's a song that failed the test of time. Stonewall worst 10 NO tracks ever. Unmitigated shite.

There'll be a Digital version of 1963 over my dead body as it features quite highly in my list of worst NO tracks...I really like State of the Nation though!